Replies to post #178862 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[marzan]

BSB, why do you want unblinding while the effect of the unblinding in terms of price rise is inevitable in a few months even if it is continued to reach more fat tail. We might see lot of positive plays unfolding as LP promised business deals. As you and I see efficacy in L, the BPs do see too. Roche just paid 5B for a gene coding company Foundation just the other day to better understand the antigens of a tumor without even not knowing how to eradicate them whereas we know how to. MRK and BMY are signing left and right all small bios coming up with no solid theory or results but just by the immunotherapy hype they are into. Just to get the NICE going, all I understood is LP has to unblind before August 15th. I am not good at all, in fact I am nothing, but I tried in the absence of flipper.

[flipper44]

Basin Street Blues,

The bare bones argument why it seems considerably more logical to move toward unblinding with the present data/refresh collection once it is completed.

This trial has been maturing for eleven years according to Linda Powers. The trial enrolled, intermittently, for eight of those years. According to 69 coauthors of the publication, no matter which year of enrollees you select from those years of enrollment, that group would not meaningfully change the survival curve/tail.

Analysis of patient survival relative to year of enrollment did not reveal a trend over time, nor meaningful differences between years. -- 69 coauthors signed off on this statement

Linda's primary argument is that she wants to see how long and how fat the tail can get. Basin, the curve/tail is already drawn out to eleven years by August 2018. It's not going to change from there according to the logical outcome from the 69 investigators' statement above.* It's simply slowing down science at this point.

*The very last 31 enrolled (but probably not randomized) might change the % alive at various milestones, but it appears from the publication they are primarily methylated MGMT. By the end of this refresh, those patients will all be beyond 36 months since surgery. Again, the KM curve/tail has been drawing for eleven years, and no particular year of enrollees has/is going to meaningfully change it. If LP makes the argument to wait for a bigger, fatter tail after this data collection and tabulation, it should fall on deaf ears, imo. If the last 31 are an anomaly, it needs to be explained why they think this. They blurred the censor pictures, they did not distinguish between LTFU possibly hidden amongst that group of censors. Why, after eleven years, is LP expecting a bigger fatter curve/tail? It's completely and utterly illogical. It's cognitive dissonance.

Science needs to move forward. Patients need to move forward. Investors need to move forward. If this therapy works (or not) matters need to move forward. There is no satisfactory reason given by NWBO that would make us expect the curve/tail will change. None. Only LP standing up there discussing bigger fatter tails. With all due respect, it's nonsense. Their own investigators tell us eleven years of data demonstrate that the curve/tai does not meaningfully change based upon year of enrollment. This is no time for NWBO to hide their scientific reasoning. If they really have a reason, they should quit treating us like babies and instead articulate it from a scientific foundation.

In the above bolded statement, the coauthors basically gave the perfect reason why this data collection should be the last refresher before unblinding.